2nd Edi 05.03.2019 F PDF

INSTITUTION OF ENGINEERS, BANGLADESH
BOARD OF ACCREDITATION FOR

ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
Accreditation Manual
for
Undergraduate Engineering Programs
March 2019
Effective from
1 January 2020
2nd Edition
www.baetebangladesh.org
INSTITUTION OF ENGINEERS, BANGLADESH
BOARD OF ACCREDITATION FOR

ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION
Accreditation Manual
for
Undergraduate Engineering Programs
March 2019
Effective from
1 January 2020
www.baetebangladesh.org 2nd Edition
2nd Edition
March 2019
Effective from 1 January, 2020
An Overview of Changes
1. Section 4.6:
a. Year-long Final Year Design Project or Capstone Project is no longer obligatory in the
curriculum. Demonstration of culminated POs in solving complex engineering problems
remains required, and the year-long Final Year Design Project or Capstone Project is the
preferred method.
2. Section 4.8:
a. The descriptions of POs have been updated following IEA Version 3.21, June 2013.
Requirements of the Knowledge Profiles (K1 - K8) have been explicitly mentioned in the
description of each PO.
b. The tables describing the Range of Complex Engineering Problem-Solving and Range of
Complex Engineering Activities have been updated following IEA Version 3.21, June 2013.
c. The program should map out how each attribute of the Knowledge Profile (K1 – K8) is
addressed in the curriculum. The program should also demonstrate how each attribute of the
Range of Complex Engineering Problems (P1 – P7) and Complex Engineering Activities (A1 –
A5) is incorporated in teaching, learning and assessment.
d. Results of evaluation of PO attainment should be reported.
3. Chapter 7:
a. Format of the SAR has been updated.
b. Sections 7.2, 7.3: New sections added on guidelines for preparing the SAR.
c. Template of the SAR has been revised putting more emphasis on narration of the policies and
processes and justifications.
d. Template for Criterion 8 has been updated in line with the revisions made in Section 4.8 of the
manual.
Prepared by
Board of Accreditation for Engineering and Technical Education, Bangladesh
IEB Headquarters, 13th Floor, Ramna
Dhaka 1000, Bangladesh
CONTENTS
Chapter 1 – Introduction 1- 01
1.1 Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh…………………………………... 1-01
1.2 Objectives of Accreditation……………………………………………… 1-01
1.3 Board of Accreditation for Engineering and Technical Education….. 1-02
1.3.1 Formation, Authorities and Functions………………………… 1-02
1.3.2 Composition and Terms of Office……………………………... 1-02
1.3.3 Management and Finance……………………………………... 1-03
1.3.4 Sectoral Committees…………………………………………… 1-03
1.3.5 Appellate Committee…………………………………………… 1-03
Chapter 2 – Accreditation Policy 2-01

2.1 Eligibility for Accreditation……………………………………………….. 2-01
2.2 Preliminary Evaluation of New Programs……………………………… 2-02
2.3 Evaluation…………………………………………………………………. 2-02
2.4 Accreditation Decisions…………………………………………………. 2-02
2.5 Deferment of Accreditation……………………………………………… 2-02
2.6 Renewal…………………………………………………………………… 2-03
2.7 Expenses and Fees……………………………………………………… 2-03
2.8 Confidentiality…………………………………………………………….. 2-03
2.9 Conflicts of Interest………………………………………………………. 2-03
Chapter 3 – Accreditation Procedure 3-01

3.1 Introduction……………………………………………………………….. 3-01
3.2 Steps in the Accreditation Process…………………………………….. 3-01
3.3 Application and Submissions…………………………………………… 3-02
3.4 Formation of the Evaluation Team……………………………………... 3-02
3.5 Pre-visit Activities………………………………………………………… 3-02
3.6 Accreditation Visit………………………………………………………… 3-03
3.7 Post-visit Activities of Evaluation Team……………………………….. 3-04
3.8 Scrutiny by Sectoral Committee………………………………………... 3-05
3.9 Response of Institution………………………………………………….. 3-05
3.10 Decision Process………………………………………………………… 3-06
3.11 Follow-up Action as a Requirement for Accreditation………………... 3-06
3.12 Dispute Resolution………………………………………………………. 3-06
Chapter 4 – Criteria 4-01

4.1 Organization and Governance……………………………………….…. 4-01
4.2 Financial and Physical Resources……………………………………... 4-01
4.3 Faculty…………………………………………………………………….. 4-02
CONTENTS
4.4 Students…………………………………………………………………… 4-02

4.5 Academic Facilities and Technical Support…………………………… 4-03
4.6 Curriculum and Teaching-Learning Processes………………………. 4-03
4.7 Program Educational Objectives (PEO)………………………………. 4-04
4.8 Program Outcomes and Assessment…………………………………. 4-04
4.9 Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI)………………………………. 4-08
4.10 Interactions with the Industry…………………………………………... 4-08
Chapter 5 – Review by Evaluation Team 5-01

5.1 Tasks for Evaluation Team……………………………………………... 5-01
5.2 Composition and Selection of Evaluation Team……………………... 5-02
5.3 Selection and Training of Evaluators………………………………….. 5-03
Chapter 6 – Program-Specific Criteria 6-01

6.1 Criteria for Aerospace Engineering or Similar Program……………… 6-01
6.2 Criteria for Biomedical Engineering or Similar Program……………... 6-01
6.3 Criteria for Chemical Engineering or Similar Program……………….. 6-01
6.4 Criteria for Civil Engineering, Civil and Environmental Engineering
or Similar Program………………………………………………………. 6-02
6.5 Criteria for Computer Science and Engineering or Similar Program.. 6-02
6.6 Criteria for Electrical Engineering, Electrical and Electronic
Engineering, Electronic and Telecommunication Engineering or
Similar Program……………………………………………………...…... 6-03
6.7 Criteria for Environmental Engineering or Similar Program…………. 6-03
6.8 Criteria for Industrial and Production Engineering or Similar
Program…………………………………………………………………… 6-04
6.9 Criteria for Metallurgical and Materials Engineering or Similar
Program…………………………………………………………………… 6-04
6.10 Criteria for Mechanical Engineering or Similar Program…………….. 6-04
6.11 Criteria for Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering or Similar
Program…………………………………………………………………… 6-05
Chapter 7 – Self-Assessment Report Format 7-01

7.1 Introduction.................................................................……………… 7-01
7.2 Guidelines for preparing the SAR.................................................... 7-01
7.3 Supplemental Documents................................................................ 7-01
7.4 Template.......................................................................................... 7-02
Annex – I Process Flow Chart

Annex – II Typical Evaluation Team Visit Schedule
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
AA Alumni Association
BAETE Board of Accreditation for Engineering and Technical Education
BAU Bangladesh Agricultural University
BPERB Bangladesh Professional Engineers Registration Board
BUET Bangladesh University of Engineering and Technology
BUTex Bangladesh University of Textiles
BDT Bangladesh Taka
CE Civil Engineering
CEE Civil and Environmental Engineering
ChE Chemical Engineering
CSE Computer Science and Engineering
CLO Course Learning Outcome/Course Learning Objective
CO Course Outcome
COs Course Outcomes
CQI Continuous Quality Improvement
CUET Chittagong University of Engineering and Technology
CV Curriculum Vitae
DUET Dhaka University of Engineering and Technology
ET Evaluation Team
EE Electrical Engineering/ Environmental Engineering
EEE Electrical and Electronic Engineering
ETE Electronic and Telecommunication Engineering
Engg. Engineering
GA Graduate Attributes
H High
IEB Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh
IEP Institute of Engineers, Pakistan
IPE Industrial and Production Engineering
IAP Industry Advisory Panel
IT Information Technology
ID Identity
KUET Khulna University of Engineering and Technology
L Low
LL Level of Learning
ME Mechanical Engineering
MME Metallurgical and Materials Engineering
M Medium
NAME Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering
NA Not Accredited
OBE Outcome-based Education
OBA Outcome-based Accreditation
Ph.D Doctor of Philosophy
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Pro-VC Pro-Vice Chancellor

PC Personal Computer
PO Program Outcome
POs Program Outcomes
PEO Program Educational Objective
PEOs Program Educational Objectives
POA Program Outcomes and Assessment
RJSC Registrar of Joint Stock Companies
RUET Rajshahi University of Engineering and Technology
R&D Research and Development
SC Sectoral Committee
SAR Self-Assessment Report
TE Textile Engineering
TSR Teacher-Student Ratio
UG Undergraduate
UGC University Grants Commission
URL Uniform Resource Locator
VC Vice Chancellor
CHAPTER
Introduction
1
Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh 1.1
The Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh (IEB) was founded as the Institute of
Engineers, Pakistan, which was registered on May 7, 1948, by the Registrar of Joint
Stock Companies, East Bengal. It was recognized as the representative body of
qualified engineers when its constitution was ratified by the government of what was
then Pakistan in September 1952. After Bangladesh emerged as an independent
country in 1971, the society’s name was changed from the Institute of Engineers,
Pakistan, to the Institution of Engineers, Bangladesh. The new organization was
registered by the Registrar of Joint Stock Companies, Government of the People’s
Republic of Bangladesh, in July 1972.
To become a member of IEB and provide professional services in Bangladesh, an

individual must hold an engineering degree recognized by IEB. Additionally, IEB
oversees the growth and quality of engineering education in Bangladesh. To this end,
the IEB constitution encompasses the accreditation of programs within the country that
award engineering degrees.
Objectives of Accreditation 1.2

In general, the accreditation of a program recognizes and acknowledges the value of
transforming a student into a capable engineer with sound knowledge of fundamentals
and an acceptable level of professional competence. The accreditation process is also
significant as a means of promoting quality by encouraging healthy competition among
different degree programs at the same institution and among similar programs at
different institutions.
The specific objectives of accreditation are as follows:
a. To ensure that graduates acquire the attributes required to meet national and
international standards;
b. To assist all stakeholders in identifying specific engineering education programs
that meet national and international standards; and
c. To provide a mechanism for the continual improvement of existing engineering
programs through evaluation and feedback.
1-2 Chapter 1 Introduction
1.3 Board of Accreditation for Engineering and Technical Education
1.3.1 Formation, Authorities and Functions
The Board of Accreditation for Engineering and Technical Education (BAETE) was
established by IEB in accordance with provision enshrined in IEB constitution. BAETE,
thereafter referred to as "the Board", is empowered to function as an independent and
autonomous body to establish the policy, procedure, criteria, and related systems to
conduct engineering program accreditation.
1.3.2 Composition and Terms of Office
The Council of IEB nominates the Chairman and the members of the first Board.
Nominations to subsequent Board positions may be made by the president of IEB in
consultation with the outgoing Chairman of the Board and other professionals/experts
in the field. The structure of the BAETE is as follows.
Chairman 1
Vice-chairman 1
Vice-president (Academic and International Affairs), IEB [Ex-Officio] 1
Honorary General Secretary, IEB [Ex-Officio] 1
Chairman, BPERB, IEB [Ex-Officio] 1
Vice-chancellor BUET or his nominee at the level of Senior Professor 1
Chairman/Member of UGC (with background in Science/Technical Education) 1
Three Vice-chancellors from DUET/RUET/KUET/CUET/BUTex/BAU or their nominees at 3
the Senior Professor level
Two members from private universities with at least one BAETE-accredited program 2
One representative of Ministry of Education not below the rank of Additional Secretary 1
(with a background in Science/Technology) in the Government of Bangladesh
Representation from Industry 1
R&D establishments 1
Eminent educationists 5
Total 20
The Board elects one of its members to act as the Member-Secretary. The term of
office for the Chairman, Vice-Chairman and members who are not “ex-officio” is four
years. The Board meets to discuss administrative issues at a time, place and
frequency chosen by the Chairman. The Board meets three times per calendar year, in
January, May and September, to make decisions regarding accreditation applications.
Chapter 1 Introduction 1-3
Management and Finance 1.3.3
The Board maintains an office (the Secretariat of the Board) in the IEB Headquarters
Building at Ramna, Dhaka. A full-time Registrar and a full-time Executive Assistant
hold offices to maintain records and assist the Board with its activities.
In principle, the BAETE is a financially self-supporting body that obtains its funds
mainly from fees from accreditation applications. Budget deficits, if any, are met by
IEB. The BAETE also welcomes contributions from industries as part of their corporate
social responsibility.
Sectoral Committees 1.3.4
The Board constitutes Sectoral Committees for different engineering programs under
broad sectors (or disciplines) such as Civil Engineering, Electrical Engineering,
Computer Science and Engineering, Mechanical Engineering, and Chemical
Engineering. The Board also defines new sectors as necessary. Each committee
comprises three members, one of whom serves as the Chair, who are experts in the
sectoral disciplines and are appointed usually for a period of three years.
Sectoral Committee members should be well versed with the accreditation systems
and the particular requirements of program-specific criteria in the relevant sectoral
disciplines. No member of the Sectoral Committee should be a member of a current
Evaluation Team or the Board.
Sectoral Committees are responsible for scrutinizing the evaluation reports in the
relevant disciplines to maintain consistency of evaluation and to ensure compliance
with accreditation policy, procedure and criteria. The Sectoral Committee submits its
independent recommendations to the Board together with the report of the Evaluation
Team. A Sectoral Committee member may accompany the Evaluation Team to act as
a resource person for on-site moderation to avoid procedural discrepancies, but shall
not participate in the direct program evaluation.
Appellate Committee 1.3.5
If an institution is not satisfied with the Board’s accreditation decision, it may apply for
a review of the decision by an Appellate Committee. The Appellate Committee is an
independent committee consisting of three members, including the Chair. Its members
are selected from among the former Board members, former Sectoral Committee
members, and former Evaluation Team Chairs and are appointed by the IEB President
after discussion with the Chair of the IEB Ethics Committee. The tenure of the
Appellate Committee is three years.
CHAPTER
Accreditation Policy
2
Eligibility for Accreditation 2.1
A program must fulfill the following requirements to be considered for accreditation:
a. An engineering degree-awarding program approved by an appropriate authority,

namely, the UGC or any other appropriate government body.
b. A duration of four years after twelve years of schooling.
c. At least one cohort has graduated from the program.
d. Program pedagogy follows outcome-based education. 1
e. Requires a minimum of 130 total credit hours. 2
The following should be noted:
i. Accreditation is voluntary and programs are considered for review and

accreditation only at the written request of the educational institution.
ii. Accreditation is granted only to programs and not to the institution as a whole.
iii. The same program offered at different campuses of an institution must be
accredited separately at each campus.
iv. The degree title of a BAETE-accredited program must properly reflect the content
of the education provided, including the field of specialization, and it must appear
on all formal documents issued by the institution (e.g., transcripts, certificates of
graduation, and certificates of enrollment).
v. The program and degree title(s) of non-accredited program(s) offered by the same
institution must be clearly distinguishable from those of an accredited program.
vi. No changes in the name/title of an accredited program shall be made without the
prior approval of the BAETE.
1 Outcome-based education (OBE) is an educational theory that bases each part of an educational
system on goals (outcomes).
2 Definition of Semester Credit Hour
Lecture Classes: One semester credit hour will be awarded for a minimum of 750 minutes of formalized
classroom instruction (contact hours) in a semester. Laboratory Classes: One semester credit hour will
be awarded for a minimum of 1500 minutes of classroom/laboratory/studio/project/dissertation (contact
hours) in a semester.
2-2 Chapter 2 Accreditation Policy
2.2 Preliminary Evaluation of New Programs

A new program may ask the BAETE to evaluate its strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities for and concerns for future accreditation when its most senior cohort is in
its second year. The Evaluation Team will identify strengths, weaknesses,
opportunities and concerns in its report without expressing approval or disapproval of
the program.
2.3 Evaluation
The evaluation of a program shall be conducted in accordance with the criteria
presented in Section 4. The evaluation process includes the examination of the
information provided in the Self-Assessment Report (SAR) and the Evaluation Team’s
findings from an on-site visit.
2.4 Accreditation Decisions

The Board will make an accreditation decision about a program based on the
recommendations of the Evaluation Team and the relevant Sectoral Committee. The
quality evaluation of a program is based on a holistic judgment in relation to the
stipulated accreditation criteria regarding compliance, concerns, weaknesses and
deficiencies.
The maximum accreditation period shall be six years if there is no deficiency and no
weakness in any of the criteria. The Board may accredit a program for a shorter period
if the program’s overall assessment is acceptable and it does not have weaknesses in
more than three criteria. The actual duration of an accreditation period may also
depend on the extent of weaknesses and/or concerns. A program may not be
accredited if any deficiency in any criterion is identified. If a program is not granted
accreditation, the institution may reapply one year later after addressing the
deficiencies and weaknesses. Normally, a program’s accreditation commences from
the date its application is submitted to the BAETE. However, a new program applying
within twelve months of the graduation of its first cohort may be granted retrospective
accreditation starting one calendar year before the application date to include the first
graduated cohort.
2.5 Deferment of Accreditation

If the Evaluation Team finds any deficiency in the program that can be corrected within
a short period, the Team may recommend to the Board, through the Sectoral
Chapter 2 Accreditation Policy 2-3
Committee, for a Deferment of Accreditation for a specified time not exceeding twelve
months. The institution may reapply within the specified time period without having to
wait the minimum one year required in the case of a "Not Accredited" decision.
Renewal 2.6
An institution may apply for the renewal of a program’s accreditation by submitting an
application at least six months before the expiration of the current accreditation. The
application must be accompanied by an SAR, which should include an account of the
shortcomings identified by the previous Evaluation Team and the extent to which these
shortcomings have been addressed. Significant improvements that have been
achieved since the last accreditation visit, particularly through the continuous quality
improvement mechanism, should be highlighted. All other processes, including the on-
site visit and the decision-making process, shall be the same as noted for the first
accreditation.
Expenses and Fees 2.7

The educational institution must pay the appropriate fees when submitting an
accreditation application. The fee structure is provided on the BAETE website.
Moreover, all visit-related expenses, including transportation, food and lodging, will be
borne by the educational institution.
Confidentiality 2.8
All information provided for accreditation by the institution, including the SAR and all
on-site observations and findings, are confidential. This information may not be
revealed to any unauthorized persons under any circumstances without written
permission from the concerned educational institution. Similarly, the institution may not
reveal any part of the Evaluation Team’s report to any unauthorized person or to the
public without explicit written permission from the BAETE.
Conflicts of Interest 2.9

Service as a BAETE board member, Sectoral Committee member or Evaluation Team
member should not create situations that may result in conflicts of interest or questions
regarding the objectivity and credibility of the accreditation process. Each individual
involved in the BAETE accreditation process is required to behave in a professional
and ethical manner and to disclose real or perceived conflicts of interest. Examples of
conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to, the following situations: being a
2-4 Chapter 2 Accreditation Policy
current or former faculty or staff member at the concerned institution, serving as a

member on any committee at the concerned institution, current or previous
involvement in any for-profit activity with the concerned institution, and having a
dependent who is a student at the concerned institution.
CHAPTER
Accreditation Procedure
3
Introduction 3.1
Application for the accreditation of an engineering program must be made formally in
writing through the head of the institution. The application must be accompanied by an
SAR duly completed in accordance with the format described in Section 7.0 of this
manual. The accreditation process commences upon verification of the accreditation
fee payment and receipt of the SAR.
The accreditation decision is made by the Board following a rigorous evaluation

process involving a review of the SAR, an on-site visit by the Evaluation Team and a
review of the Evaluation Team report by the Sectoral Committee.
Steps in the Accreditation Process 3.2

The steps involved in the accreditation process are as follows. All communications at
every step should occur through the Registrar, BAETE.
1. Submission of the application

2. Formation of the Evaluation Team
3. Communication to the institution about the formation of the Evaluation Team
4. Communication of the institution’s reservations about any member of the
Evaluation Team, if any
5. Review of the SAR
6. On-site visit
7. Submission of Evaluation Team report
8. Scrutiny by the Sectoral Committee
9. Response of the institution to factual matters
10. Recommendation of the Sectoral Committee
11. Decision of the Board
12. Communication of the decision to the institution
Annex I provides a schematic flow chart of the steps. The maximum time allocated for
each step is shown in the following table.
3-2 Chapter 3 Accreditation Procedure
Steps Maximum allocated time

Formation of the Evaluation Team 3 weeks
Communication of the institution’s reservations 1 week
On-site visit 12 weeks
Report of the Evaluation Team 3 weeks
Scrutiny by the Sectoral Committee 2 weeks
Response of the institution to factual matters 1 week
Recommendation of the Sectoral Committee 2 weeks
Decision of the Board 16 weeks
3.3 Application and Submissions

The institution must submit separate application(s) in the prescribed format for the
accreditation of each of its eligible programs. The application must accompany a
completed SAR and other information/documents as stated in Section 7.0.
If a program’s accreditation is about to expire, the institution must apply for re-
accreditation by submitting an application at least six months before the current
accreditation expires.
3.4 Formation of the Evaluation Team

An Evaluation Team consisting of a Chairperson and two members will be formed by a
sub-committee of the Board within three (3) weeks of receiving a completed
application package for accreditation. The Chairperson will be a senior academic or a
practicing professional in a relevant engineering discipline with adequate experience in
the accreditation process. At least one of the members will be from the industry. The
Chairperson and team members shall be selected from a pool of qualified evaluators.
Upon notification of the formation of the Evaluation Team, the institution may express
reservations in writing about any member who may have a conflict of interest, as per
Section 2.9, within one (1) week. The specific reason must be cited. The Evaluation
Team members are required to declare possible conflicts of interest with the program
and the institution, if any, and to abide by the code of confidentiality and professional
conduct.
3.5 Pre-visit Activities

The Evaluation Team will first review the submitted SAR. If the SAR indicates
significant deficiencies in the program and/or the institution, the Evaluation Team may
decide not to recommend the program for accreditation without performing the on-site
visit. When the SAR indicates that the program is eligible for accreditation, the
Chapter 3 Accreditation Procedure 3-3
Chairperson of the Evaluation Team will contact the institution through the BAETE
Registrar to arrange the accreditation visit.
Accreditation Visit 3.6

The Evaluation Team will conduct a three-day visit within twelve (12) weeks of its
formation.
3.6.1 The on-site visit allows the Evaluation Team to assess factors related to the
accreditation criteria that may not be adequately described in the SAR and to obtain
further clarifications from the educational institution. Although it is not possible to
adequately describe all the factors to be assessed during the on-site visit, some
common factors include the following:
a. Objectives and outcomes of the education provided

b. Quality assurance processes, including internal reviews
c. Assessment of student learning outcomes
d. Student activities and work
e. Entry standards for admission and student selection
f. Faculty members’ motivation and enthusiasm
g. Faculty members’ qualifications and activities
h. Facilities
i. Industry participation
3.6.2 To assist the Evaluation Team in its assessment, the educational institution
should arrange the following:
a. Meetings with:
i. The Head of the institution, the Dean and Head of the Department, and
relevant program and course coordinators
ii. A member of the senior administration/management, preferably the Head of
the institution, to discuss how the program fits into the university’s overall
strategic direction and focus and the management support available for the
continued resourcing and development of the program
iii. A group of faculty members
iv. A group of supporting staff and heads of the support/service departments
v. A group of employee representatives
vi. A group of alumni
vii. A group of students
b. Availability of the following documents for examination:

i. Curriculum vitae of all program faculty members
ii. Evidence that the results of the course and program outcome assessment are
being used to review the program and ensure ongoing improvement
iii. Lists of publications by all program faculty members
iv. Sample teaching materials
v. Sample examination papers, quizzes and class tests for all subjects
vi. Sample examination scripts, including at least one excellent, one good and
one marginal pass for each examination
vii. Transcripts of immediate past graduates, including those granted advanced
standing and those who were in the part-time program if applicable
viii. Sample student project and design reports (excellent, good and marginal
pass)
ix. Sample student feedback form
x. Results of other internal or external reviews of the program, department and
faculty
xi. Quality assurance review results
xii. Records of meetings of committees relevant to the program
xiii. Records of meetings with stakeholders
xiv. Graduates’ employment records
xv. Any other documents that the Evaluation Team may request
c. Visits to:
i. Faculty office rooms
ii. Classrooms
iii. Laboratories, especially those used for undergraduate courses
iv. The library
v. IT facilities
vi. Career/placement center, co- and extra-curricular facilities, medical facilities
vii. Canteen
viii. Washrooms/toilet facilities
3.6.3 At the end of the on-site visit, the Evaluation Team will hold an exit meeting
to present its preliminary findings to key personnel of the educational institution,
including the Head of the institution and the Head of Department/Chair of School for
the program being evaluated.
3.7 Post-visit Activities of Evaluation Team

The Evaluation Team will submit its evaluation report to the BAETE Registrar within
three (3) weeks of the visit. In finalizing its report with findings and recommendations,
the Evaluation Team may consider additional submissions requested from the
institution during the on-site visit. The Evaluation Team will make a holistic quality
judgment of each criterion against the benchmark requirements stipulated in this
Chapter 3 Accreditation Procedure 3-5
manual in terms of compliance, concern, weakness and deficiency. These terms are
defined as follows.
Compliance: A criterion, policy, or procedure has adequately satisfied the benchmark

requirements stipulated in the manual. No corrective measure is required to strengthen
compliance prior to the next review.
Concern: A criterion, policy, or procedure is broadly in compliance but requires

improvement to avoid compromising the quality of the program or is currently in
compliance but the potential exists for the situation to change, resulting in future non-
compliance. Progress on the corrective measures is required prior to the next review.
Weakness: A criterion, policy, or procedure lacks compliance, compromising the

quality of the program. Corrective measures are required to strengthen compliance
prior to the next review.
Deficiency: A criterion, policy, or procedure either does not exist or is in the

elementary stage. Compliance is required.
The findings and recommendations of the Evaluation Team must be supported with
evidence. Although the Evaluation Team should not prescribe the details of the
corrective measures to be taken, some broad-level recommendations and suggestions
are required. The evaluation report may briefly highlight the strengths of the program
and the institution as encouragement and in recognition of good practices.
Scrutiny by Sectoral Committee 3.8

The Evaluation Team’s report will be moderated for consistency and procedural
discrepancies by the relevant Sectoral Committee within two (2) weeks of submission.
If the Sectoral Committee identifies areas of inconsistency or procedural
discrepancies, the Evaluation Team will be asked to provide clarification and/or revise
the report.
Response of Institution 3.9

The moderated report will be shared with the institution, which may submit a written
response regarding any factual error in the report within one (1) week. The educational
institution does not have the right to require a change in the report but may note any
statement that may be incorrect or provide comments. The Sectoral Committee will
submit the institution’s response along with the Evaluation Team’s report and its
recommendation to the Registrar of BAETE to table for decision making at the next
BAETE board meeting. The Evaluation Team will receive a copy of the moderated
report along with the institution’s response and the Sectoral Committee’s
recommendation.
3.10 Decision Process

The Board will make the final decision regarding the application for accreditation
primarily based on the findings and recommendations of the Evaluation Team, with
moderation by the Sectoral Committee. In making its decision, the Board will adhere to
the published accreditation policy and procedure and ensure the consistency of
discipline-specific program criteria across different institutions.
The Board will make a decision within sixteen (16) weeks from the date the
recommendation of the Sectoral Committee is submitted. The accreditation decision
will be communicated to the concerned institution.
3.11 Follow-up Action as a Requirement for Accreditation

If follow-up action is required as a condition for accreditation, the BAETE will require
the educational institution to submit a report within a specified period. The specified
period will vary depending on the nature of the requirement and whether the follow-up
actions can be developed and implemented within a short time frame. The BAETE
may also require a follow-up visit to review the actions taken by the educational
institution. The educational institution must meet all direct costs associated with the
follow-up visit.
3.12 Dispute Resolution

An institution may appeal the accreditation decision in writing within two (2) weeks of
receiving the decision and paying a prescribed fee. An appeal may include a request
for re-consideration or a revisit and should be accompanied by a report to substantiate
the request. The appeal will be submitted to the Appellate Committee for deliberation.
The Appellate Committee may invite the institution filing the petition and the members
of the Evaluation Team to present their positions. Appellate Committee itself will
determine its methods of operation, giving due consideration to the substance of the
appeal petition. The Appellate Committee may ask the BAETE to consider the appeal
based on the SAR submitted by the institution. BAETE should respond to its
recommendations within one (1) month. The Appellate Committee will make the final
decision within three (3) months after receiving the appeal petition. If the petition is
denied, the Appellate Committee will provide the institution with reasons for the denial.
CHAPTER
Criteria
4
This section presents the criteria that a program must meet to become accredited. The
following sub-sections sequentially outline the ten major criteria.
Organization and Governance 4.1

Major positions should be filled, and the statutory bodies/committees of the institution
should be formed in accordance with the applicable rules and guidelines. These
positions include Vice Chancellor, Pro-Vice Chancellor, Treasurer, Dean, and
Chairperson and bodies/committees such as the Board of Trustees, Syndicate,
Academic Council, Admission Committee, Finance Committee, Curriculum Committee
and the Faculty Selection Committee. The position appointees and committee
members should function effectively as per the roles defined in the relevant act/statute.
The institution should have published policies, including a mechanism for addressing
grievances, regarding academic and administrative matters involving students, faculty
members and non-teaching employees. These policies should be put into practice.
Financial and Physical Resources 4.2

The financial resources of the institution should be adequate to fulfill its mission and
vision. The financial resources committed to the program should also be sufficient for
the appropriate functioning of the program, including recruiting and retaining qualified
faculty members, and procuring the necessary lab equipment and equipment and tools
to support teaching and learning.
The institution should have a process for budget planning and allocate resources to
the priority areas as required. The campus infrastructure, such as the extent of the
land and built-up area, extra- and co-curricular facilities, and support facilities,
including maintenance support for infrastructure and facilities, should be adequate for
the total number of students and employees at the institution.
The possibility of any risk from manmade or natural hazards should be properly
assessed and addressed in the Safety Plan. All labs shall have their own plans to
prevent and manage incidents and accidents. Fire detection and firefighting facilities
4-2 Chapter 4 Criteria
should be adequate. An action plan is required to address safety issues as the

situation demands. Adequate measures should be in place to make the campus safe
for students, employees and visitors.
4.3 Faculty
The department should have a sufficient number of full-time faculty members to ensure
that the faculty are not overloaded with courses and that the program does not
become overly dependent on part-time faculty members.
The faculty members should have adequate academic qualifications with

specializations in areas closely related to the program(s) offered by the department.
The proportion of senior faculty members and junior faculty members should be
appropriate. Adequate interaction between students and faculty members both within
and outside classes is essential. The teacher-student ratio, class size and teaching
load should not compromise opportunities for interaction.
Faculty members should be motivated to improve their pedagogy and assist the
students in achieving outcomes. They should be committed to the continuous quality
improvement activities of the department. Faculty members should have the
responsibility and authority to design and update the curriculum, establish course and
program outcomes, and select and use appropriate assessment tools for evaluating
student performance in classes and the achievement of outcomes.
Faculty members should be engaged in research, development and professional

activities such as consulting. They should also be involved in relevant professional
societies. The results of these activities should benefit the students. The institution or
department should periodically arrange training for the faculty members on outcome-
based education and assessment. All the faculty members should be adequately
trained on how to establish course outcomes, conduct teaching-learning activities that
are appropriate for the outcomes and assess the level of outcome achievement.
4.4 Students
There should be a published policy for the admission and transfer of students into the
program. The admission or transfer requirements should be appropriate for the
selection of students with the potential to achieve the program’s outcomes. The policy
should be implemented in practice. Transfer students must also show the attainment
of program outcomes from courses in the institution.
Students’ academic performance should be continuously monitored in terms of the

achievement of outcomes, and feedback should be provided to the students. There
Chapter 4 Criteria 4-3
should be provisions for remedial or corrective measures when necessary. Every

student should be assigned an advisor. The advisor should counsel, guide and mentor
the student on all academic and professional matters.
Students should have opportunities to participate in extra- and co-curricular activities

and the activities of relevant professional societies. The institution should ensure the
participation of a significant number of students.
Academic Facilities and Technical Support 4.5

The institution should have a well-stocked library. The books, e-books, journals and
other resources available in the library should be adequate for the program and the
faculty members. The number of classrooms available should be adequate to properly
run the program. The classroom facilities and the environment should be conducive to
learning.
The number of labs and equipment should be adequate for conducting the program’s
various laboratory courses. Every student should have the opportunity for hands-on
activity in the laboratories. Each lab should have adequate safety and health
measures.
Students and faculty members should have access to adequate computing and
Internet facilities, including hardware, software tools and support.
Curriculum and Teaching-Learning Processes 4.6

The curriculum should satisfy the relevant program-specific criteria described in
Section 6.
The breadth and depth of the curriculum and the teaching-learning activities should be
appropriate for solving complex engineering problems in the relevant discipline. The
curriculum should contain an adequate number of courses on mathematics, physical
science, humanities and non-engineering subjects. The teaching-learning processes
and activities selected for each course should be effective and appropriate for
achieving the outcomes. Student participation and learning should be enhanced.
Hands-on activities in the lab should be an integral part of teaching and learning. The
program should include adequate activities in the lab.
The program should demonstrate the culmination of program outcomes (POs) at the
level of solving complex engineering problems, preferably through a final-year design
project or capstone project extending over a period of one year.
4.7 Program Educational Objectives

Program Educational Objectives (PEOs) are broad statements that describe the career
and professional accomplishments that the program is preparing graduates to achieve.
PEOs are assessable based on the attributes and accomplishments of graduates,
preferably those who have worked for 3 to 5 years after graduation. Each engineering
program should have published PEOs that are clear, concise, assessable and realistic
within the context of the available resources. The PEOs should be consistent with the
vision and mission of the department offering the program. They should be supported
by a curriculum and teaching-learning processes that lead to the attainment of these
objectives. Justifications should be provided for how the curriculum and the outcomes
contribute to the attainment of the PEOs.
A process should be developed to assess the level of attainment of each PEO to

evaluate the academic program’s effectiveness. Adequate evidence and
documentation on the assessment of PEO attainment should be provided. The
assessment tools should be indicated, and the way in which these tools are used
should be explained. PEO assessment should lead to the periodic review of PEOs.
Feedback from the various program stakeholders, including employers, alumni,
students and faculty, should be considered during the review.
4.8 Program Outcomes and Assessment

Program Outcomes (POs) or graduate attributes are narrower statements that
describe what students are expected to know and be able to do by the time of
graduation. These statements relate to the knowledge, skills and attitudes acquired by
students while progressing through the program. The program must demonstrate that
by the time of graduation, students have achieved an acceptable minimum level of
certain knowledge, skills and behavioral traits. The BAETE specifically requires that
students acquire the following graduate attributes:
(a) Engineering knowledge: Apply knowledge of mathematics, natural science,

engineering fundamentals and an engineering specialization as specified in K1 to K4
respectively to the solution of complex engineering problems.
(b) Problem analysis: Identify, formulate, research literature and analyse complex
engineering problems reaching substantiated conclusions using first principles of
mathematics, natural sciences and engineering sciences. (K1 to K4)
(c) Design/development of solutions: Design solutions for complex engineering

problems and design systems, components or processes that meet specified needs
with appropriate consideration for public health and safety, cultural, societal, and
environmental considerations. (K5)
(d) Investigation: Conduct investigations of complex problems using research-based

knowledge (K8) and research methods including design of experiments, analysis and
interpretation of data, and synthesis of information to provide valid conclusions.
(e) Modern tool usage: Create, select and apply appropriate techniques, resources,
and modern engineering and IT tools, including prediction and modelling, to complex
engineering problems, with an understanding of the limitations. (K6)
(f) The engineer and society: Apply reasoning informed by contextual knowledge to
assess societal, health, safety, legal and cultural issues and the consequent
responsibilities relevant to professional engineering practice and solutions to complex
engineering problems. (K7)
(g) Environment and sustainability: Understand and evaluate the sustainability

and impact of professional engineering work in the solution of complex engineering
problems in societal and environmental contexts. (K7)
(h) Ethics: Apply ethical principles and commit to professional ethics and
responsibilities and norms of engineering practice. (K7)
(i) Individual work and teamwork: Function effectively as an individual, and as

a member or leader in diverse teams and in multi-disciplinary settings.
(j) Communication: Communicate effectively on complex engineering activities

with the engineering community and with society at large, such as being able to
comprehend and write effective reports and design documentation, make effective
presentations, and give and receive clear instructions.
(k) Project management and finance: Demonstrate knowledge and understanding

of engineering management principles and economic decision-making and apply these
to one’s own work, as a member and leader in a team, to manage projects and in
multidisciplinary environments.
(l) Life-long learning: Recognize the need for, and have the preparation and ability
to engage in independent and life-long learning in the broadest context of
technological change.
In addition to incorporating the above-listed POs (graduate attributes), the educational

institution may include additional outcomes in its learning programs. An engineering
program that aims to attain the abovementioned POs should ensure that its curriculum
encompasses all the attributes of the Knowledge Profile (K1 – K8) as presented in
Table 4.1 and as included in the PO statements. The ranges of Complex Problem
Solving (P1 – P7) and Complex Engineering Activities (A1 – A5) that should be
addressed in the program are given in Tables 4.2 and 4.3, respectively.
Table 4.1: Knowledge Profile
Attribute
K1 A systematic, theory-based understanding of the natural sciences applicable to the
discipline
K2 Conceptually based mathematics, numerical analysis, statistics and the formal aspects
of computer and information science to support analysis and modeling applicable to
the discipline
K3 A systematic, theory-based formulation of engineering fundamentals required in the
engineering discipline
K4 Engineering specialist knowledge that provides theoretical frameworks and bodies of
knowledge for the accepted practice areas in the engineering discipline; much is at the
forefront of the discipline
K5 Knowledge that supports engineering design in a practice area
K6 Knowledge of engineering practice (technology) in the practice areas in the
engineering discipline
K7 Comprehension of the role of engineering in society and identified issues in
engineering practice in the discipline: ethics and the engineer’s professional
responsibility to public safety; the impacts of engineering activity; economic, social,
cultural, environmental and sustainability
K8 Engagement with selected knowledge in the research literature of the discipline
Table 4.2: Range of Complex Engineering Problem Solving
Attribute Complex Engineering Problems have characteristic P1 and

some or all of P2 to P7:
Depth of knowledge required P1: Cannot be resolved without in-depth engineering
knowledge at the level of one or more of K3, K4, K5, K6 or K8
which allows a fundamentals-based, first principles analytical
approach
Range of conflicting P2: Involve wide-ranging or conflicting technical, engineering
requirements and other issues
Depth of analysis required P3: Have no obvious solution and require abstract thinking,
originality in analysis to formulate suitable models
Familiarity of issues P4: Involve infrequently encountered issues
Extent of applicable codes P5: Are outside problems encompassed by standards and
codes of practice for professional engineering
Extent of stakeholder P6: Involve diverse groups of stakeholders with widely varying
involvement and conflicting needs

requirements
Interdependence P7: Are high level problems including many component parts or
sub-problems
Table 4.3: Range of Complex Engineering Activities
Attribute Complex activities means (engineering) activities or projects

that have some or all of the following characteristics:
Range of resources A1: Involve the use of diverse resources (and for this purpose
resources include people, money, equipment, materials,
information and technologies)
Level of interaction A2: Require resolution of significant problems arising from
interactions between wide-ranging or conflicting technical,
engineering or other issues
Innovation A3: Involve creative use of engineering principles and research-
based knowledge in novel ways
Consequences for society A4: Have significant consequences in a range of contexts,
and the environment characterized by difficulty of prediction and mitigation
Familiarity A5: Can extend beyond previous experiences by applying
principles-based approaches
The program should describe the process involved in defining and refining the POs.
The correlation between the course outcomes (COs) and POs should be demonstrated
through the mapping of COs onto POs.
The way in which each attribute of the Knowledge Profile (K1 – K8) is addressed in the
curriculum should be demonstrated through mapping. The program should also
demonstrate how each attribute of the Range of Complex Engineering Problems (P1 –
P7) and Complex Engineering Activities (A1 – A5) is incorporated in the teaching,
learning and assessment.
For each course, a course file must be maintained. The course file should include the
assessment of outcomes, curriculum, examination questions and answer scripts, the
results of other assessments, and a summary of performance and attainment of
course outcomes with suggestions or feedback for future development.
POs should be assessed using direct methods. Direct methods of assessment are
accomplished through the direct examination or observation of students’ knowledge or
skills against measurable performance indicators or rubrics. In addition, indirect
methods may also be used for PO assessment. Indirect methods of assessment are
based on opinions or self-reports from different stakeholders. The way in which various
assessment tools, including examinations and rubrics, contribute to the evaluation of
attainment of each PO should be described. The results of the evaluation of PO

attainment should be shown.
4.9 Continuous Quality Improvement

The program should have a continuous quality improvement mechanism. It should
demonstrate an established system for periodically compiling the level of attainment in
terms of PEO, including a mechanism for tracking and obtaining feedback from
graduates and their employers. The outcomes of these exercises should be evaluated,
and the identified shortcomings and limitations should be used to refine and improve
the program.
POs should be assessed on a regular cycle. The program should prepare CQI file for
each of the 12 POs to review. Each teaching module should have clear quality
requirements and facilitate the achievement of COs through teaching and evaluation
methods. Students should provide feedback in every course on the appropriateness of
the COs, course content, delivery of content, assessment and the attainment of the
COs. The concerned course instructor should prepare course review reports including
CQI files for the courses he/she is teaching. The program should also evaluate the
curriculum and teaching quality on a regular basis while considering feedback from
faculty members and students. The program should demonstrate that the results of
this periodic evaluation are used for continuous improvement.
4.10 Interactions with the Industry

A communication channel between the educational institution and the industry should
be in place. The industry should be encouraged to provide feedback concerning the
quality of the teaching-learning process. There must be industry participation in the
development of the curriculum to ensure that it is relevant, regularly updated, and
meets the needs of the industry, particularly in areas experiencing rapid changes. An
engineering program should have an Industry Advisory Panel (IAP) and an alumni
association (AA) for this purpose. The IAP or AA may meet at certain intervals with the
department to provide feedback.
The program should provide students with the opportunity to obtain industrial
experience through internships, industry visits or design projects conducted by
practicing engineers and faculty members with industrial experience.
CHAPTER
Review by Evaluation Team

5
Tasks for Evaluation Team 5.1
5.1.1 After members of the evaluation team have been appointed, the BAETE will
notify the educational institution and the Sectoral Committee of the composition of the
Evaluation Team. The Sectoral Committee will notify the evaluation team of whether
any member of the committee will accompany the team during the on-site visit as a
moderator. The BAETE will advise the educational institution to contact the
Chairperson of the Evaluation Team through the BAETE Registrar to make
arrangements for the on-site visit and to provide the name and contact number of a
person for further information and clarification if necessary.
5.1.2 Members of the Evaluation Team should note that all correspondence
between the educational institution and the BAETE, all reports made during the
evaluation process and information regarding whether a program from an educational
institution is being considered for accreditation are to be classified as confidential and
should not be released to any unauthorized persons except with written permission
from both the educational institution and the BAETE.
5.1.3 To maintain impartiality and transparency in the accreditation process, no

member of the Evaluation Team should participate in any activity that might involve a
conflict of interest.
5.1.4 The Evaluation Team members will conduct a comprehensive review of the
documentation provided on the SAR. If additional information or clarifications of the
information furnished by the educational institution are required, members will channel
their requests through the Chairperson of the Evaluation Team, who will liaise with the
contact person of the educational institution through the BAETE Registrar to obtain the
information needed.
5.1.5 The Evaluation Team should meet before the on-site visit to discuss its
preliminary findings from the documentation.
5.1.6 The on-site visit will usually be conducted over a period of three days for each
program. A sample of on-site activities is provided in Annex II as a guide to the
assessment to be conducted during the on-site visit.
5-2 Chapter 5 Review by Evaluation Team
5.1.7 An exit meeting should be conducted at the end of the on-site visit program, at
which the Evaluation Team will present its preliminary findings orally to the educational
institution.
5.1.8 In the event that an educational institution requires follow-up activities (for
example, the educational institution may be required to present additional information
that needs to be assessed), the evaluation team may appoint one of its members to
conduct another visit to review the work.
5.1.9 The draft report of the evaluation team is expected to be prepared and
forwarded to the respective Sectoral Committee within 3 weeks after the on-site visit.
5.2 Composition and Selection of Evaluation Team

The BAETE maintains a data bank of its trained program evaluators from which
potential Evaluation Team members are selected. This data bank will be updated
periodically. The program evaluators may be active or retired professionals.
Each Evaluation Team will consist of three members:

a) A Chairperson
b) Two Program Evaluators
The members of the Evaluation Team will be drawn from the following:
a) Academic institutions of repute
b) R&D laboratories and establishments
c) The government
d) Corporation/industry.
Industry Program Evaluators will be drawn from the domain areas relevant to the
program. The Chairperson must not be below the rank of professor (or equivalent in
the case of industry) and should have significant experience through previous
participation as a program evaluator.
Normally, program evaluators from academia will be required to possess the following:
a) Significant teaching and research experience in the university and good standing
in their respective disciplines
b) Demonstrable expertise in engineering education and/or a specific engineering
discipline through publication and/or technology development
c) Good knowledge and skills for conduction program evaluations, obtained through
training by BAETE or other accreditation bodies
d) A Ph.D. or equivalent as the highest academic degree
Chapter 5 Review by Evaluation Team 5-3
Normally, the program evaluators from industry will be required to possess the
following:
a) Significant industrial experience, generally not less than 10 years of considerable

engineering/managerial experience
b) Demonstrable expertise in the specific engineering discipline of the program to be
evaluated for accreditation
c) Good knowledge and skills for conducting program evaluation, obtained through
training by BAETE or other accreditation bodies
d) A rank equivalent to senior manager or higher, preferably with post-graduate
qualifications
Selection and Training of Evaluators 5.3

To ensure program evaluation competence and to standardize the evaluation process,
the BAETE provides regular training and orientation for program evaluators and team
chairs through workshops and seminars. These trainings also help update the program
evaluators regarding the BAETE’s current policies.
The core knowledge and competencies required for program evaluators include the
following:
a) Accreditation policy
b) Accreditation procedure
c) Requirements of general accreditation criteria and specific program criteria
d) Evaluation and judgment of compliance with benchmark standards of accreditation
criteria
e) Outcome-based assessment
f) DOs and DON’Ts during on-site accreditation visits
CHAPTER
Program-Specific Criteria
6
Criteria for Aerospace Engineering or Similar Program 6.1
Aeronautical engineering programs must prepare graduates with knowledge of
aerodynamics, aerospace materials, structures, propulsion, flight mechanics, and
stability and control. Astronautical engineering programs must prepare graduates with
knowledge of orbital mechanics, space environment, attitude determination and
control, telecommunications, space structures, and rocket propulsion. Aerospace
engineering programs or other engineering programs combining aeronautical
engineering and astronautical engineering must prepare graduates with knowledge
covering one of the areas (i.e., aeronautical engineering or astronautical engineering)
described above and knowledge of some topics from the other area. Programs must
also prepare graduates to have design competence that includes the integration of
aeronautical or astronautical topics.
Criteria for Biomedical Engineering or Similar Program 6.2

The structure of the curriculum must provide both breadth and depth across the range
of engineering and science topics consistent with the program’s educational objectives
and student outcomes. The curriculum must prepare graduates with experience in the
following:
a. Applying the principles of engineering, biology, human physiology, chemistry,

calculus-based physics, mathematics (through differential equations) and statistics
b. Solving bio/biomedical engineering problems, including those associated with the
interaction between living and non-living systems
c. Analyzing, modeling, designing, and realizing bio/biomedical engineering devices,
systems, components, or processes
d. Measuring and interpreting data from living systems
Criteria for Chemical Engineering or Similar Program 6.3

The curriculum shall provide a thorough grounding in the basic sciences that include
chemistry, physics and mathematics as appropriate to the objectives of the program.
Due emphasis shall also be given to social sciences and communications. The
6-2 Chapter 6 Program-Specific Criteria
curriculum must include topics such as engineering thermodynamics, fluid mechanics,

heat and mass transfer, process control and design. The Process Design Project shall
be a requirement for completion of the degree.
6.4 Criteria for Civil Engineering, Civil and Environmental

Engineering or Similar Program
The curriculum must prepare graduates to apply knowledge of mathematics through
differential equations, calculus-based physics, chemistry, and at least one additional
area of basic science; apply probability and statistics to address uncertainty; analyze
and solve problems in at least four technical areas appropriate to civil engineering;
conduct experiments in at least two technical areas of civil engineering and analyze
and interpret the resulting data; design a system, component, or process in at least
two civil engineering contexts; include principles of sustainability in design; explain
basic concepts in project management, business, public policy, and leadership;
analyze issues in professional ethics; and explain the importance of professional
licensure.
6.5 Criteria for Computer Science and Engineering or Similar

Program
of engineering and science topics consistent with the program’s educational objectives
and student outcomes. The curriculum must include the following: probability and
statistics, differential and integral calculus, discrete mathematics, basic sciences,
computer science, and engineering sciences for the analysis and design of complex
electrical and electronic devices, software, and systems containing hardware and
software components; concepts of programming languages, data structures,
algorithms and complexity, software design, digital logic, computer organization and
architecture, operating systems and networking systems must be addressed; the
integration of theory, practice, and tools for the specification, design, implementation,
testing and maintenance of software systems; exposure to a variety of programming
languages and systems, including proficiency in at least one higher-level language;
and advanced coursework that builds on the fundamental coursework to provide
depth.
Chapter 6 Program-Specific Criteria 6-3
Criteria for Electrical Engineering, Electrical and Electronic 6.6

Engineering, Electronic and Telecommunication Engineering
or Similar Program
of engineering topics implied by the title of the program. The curriculum must include
probability and statistics, including applications appropriate to the program’s name;
mathematics through differential and integral calculus; sciences (defined as biological,
chemical, or physical science); and engineering topics (including computing science)
necessary to analyze and design complex electrical and electronic devices, software,
and systems containing hardware and software components. The curriculum for
programs containing the modifier “electrical,” “electronic(s),” “communication(s),” or
“telecommunication(s)” in the title must include advanced mathematics such as
differential equations, linear algebra and complex variables. The curriculum for
programs containing the modifier “communication(s)” or “telecommunication(s)” in the
title must include topics in communication theory and systems. The curriculum for
programs containing the modifier “telecommunication(s)” must include the design and
operation of telecommunication networks for services such as voice, data, image, and
video transport.
Criteria for Environmental Engineering or Similar Program 6.7

The curriculum must prepare graduates to apply knowledge of mathematics through
differential equations, probability and statistics, calculus-based physics, chemistry
(including stoichiometry, equilibrium, and kinetics), an earth science, a biological
science, and fluid mechanics. The curriculum must prepare graduates to formulate
material and energy balances and analyze the fate and transport of substances in and
between air, water, and soil phases; conduct lab experiments and analyze and
interpret the resulting data in more than one major environmental engineering focus
area (e.g., air, water, land, environmental health); design environmental engineering
systems that include considerations of risk, uncertainty, sustainability, life-cycle
principles, and environmental impacts; and apply advanced principles and practices
relevant to the program objectives. The curriculum must prepare graduates to
understand concepts of professional practice, project management, and the roles and
responsibilities of public institutions and private organizations pertaining to
environmental policy and regulations.
6-4 Chapter 6 Program-Specific Criteria
6.8 Criteria for Industrial and Production Engineering or Similar

Program
The curriculum must prepare graduates to design, develop, implement, and improve
integrated systems that include people, materials, information, equipment and energy.
The curriculum must include in-depth instruction that promotes the integration of
systems using appropriate analytical, computational, and experimental practices.
The program must prepare graduates to have proficiency in (a) materials and
manufacturing processes: the ability to design manufacturing processes that result in
products that meet specific material and other requirements; (b) process, assembly
and product engineering: the ability to design products and the equipment, tooling, and
environment necessary for their manufacture; (c) manufacturing competitiveness: the
ability to create competitive advantage through manufacturing planning, strategy,
quality, and control; (d) manufacturing systems design: the ability to analyze,
synthesize, and control manufacturing operations using statistical methods; and (e)
manufacturing lab or facility experience: the ability to measure manufacturing process
variables and develop technical inferences about the process.
6.9 Criteria for Metallurgical and Materials Engineering or Similar

Program
The curriculum must prepare graduates to apply advanced science (such as
chemistry, biology and physics), computational techniques and engineering principles
to the materials systems implied by the program modifier (e.g., ceramics, metals,
polymers, biomaterials, composite materials); to integrate the understanding of the
scientific and engineering principles underlying the four major elements of the field:
structure, properties, processing, and performance related to the appropriate material
systems; to apply and integrate knowledge from each of the above four elements of
the field using experimental, computational and statistical methods to solve materials
problems, including selection and design, consistent with the program’s educational
objectives.
6.10 Criteria for Mechanical Engineering or Similar Program

The curriculum must require students to apply principles of engineering, basic science,
and mathematics (including multivariate calculus and differential equations) and to
model, analyze, design, and realize physical systems, components or processes;
additionally, it must prepare students to work professionally in either thermal or
mechanical systems while requiring coursework in both areas.
Chapter 6 Program-Specific Criteria 6-5
Criteria for Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering or 6.11

Similar Program
The program must prepare graduates to apply probability and statistical methods to
naval architecture and marine engineering problems; to have basic knowledge of fluid
mechanics, dynamics, structural mechanics, materials properties, hydrostatics, and
energy/propulsion systems in the context of marine vehicles; and to have familiarity
with instrumentation appropriate to naval architecture and/or marine engineering.
CHAPTER
Self-Assessment Report
Format
7
Introduction 7.1
This section provides a generic form for the Self-Assessment Report (SAR) that an
institution must submit to begin the accreditation process. The SAR should reflect the
quantitative and qualitative assessment of the strengths and limitations of the program
being submitted for accreditation.
Guidelines for preparing the SAR 7.2

The completed SAR should describe how the institution and the program comply with
the regulations and requirements as stipulated in the relevant act/statute and with the
benchmark of the BAETE in each of the criteria.
The following points should be noted while preparing the SAR.
1. The data and the information provided in the SAR should be adequate and should
be supplemented by comments and discussions that will allow the evaluation team
to perform a preliminary evaluation of the program based on the SAR.
2. For any criteria and sub-criteria, the SAR should generally address the following
three questions. Data, examples of cases and other supporting information should
be included in the SAR to justify the assertions. The challenges faced and the way
in which these were overcome during enactment, implementation and
improvement of each policy and process should also be described.
a. Is there a policy/process in place?
b. If ‘yes’, is the policy/process in practice?
c. Does any improvement mechanism exist for the policy/process?
3. The SAR should proactively and unambiguously identify the deviation from the
act/statute where and when one exists.
Supplemental Documents 7.3

The following documents must be provided in the Annexure.
1. Latest copy of the prospectus and a copy of the institution’s latest academic
calendar.
7-2 Chapter 7 Self-Assessment Report Format
2. Copy of the letter of approval to establish the institution from the appropriate
authority.
3. Copy of the letter of approval to establish the program from the appropriate
authority.
4. Copy of statutes/academic ordinances.
All other documents requested in the SAR template shall have to be provided as
Annexure(s). The SAR and the Annexure should be printed on both sides of A4 size
paper arranged in two volumes. The SAR should not exceed 200 pages. A soft copy
should be given with each volume contained in one file.
7.4 Template
The template for the Self-Assessment Report (SAR) begins on the next page.
This section provides a generic form for the SAR that an institution must submit to
begin the accreditation process. All supporting documents shall have to be appended
at the end of the SAR as Annexes. All the pages of the submitted SAR including the
annexes shall have to be consecutively numbered.
Chapter 7 Self-Assessment Report Format 7-3
Board of Accreditation for Engineering and

Technical Education (BAETE)
Self-Assessment Report (SAR)

for Accreditation
of the
Program Name
Institute Name
Location
Month, Year
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Table of Annexure 2
General Information 3
Contact Information 3
Eligibility for Accreditation 4
For Renewal of Accreditation Only 5
Criterion 1: Organization and Governance 6
Criterion 2: Financial and Physical Resources 9
Criterion 3: Faculty 11
Criterion 4: Students 13
Criterion 5: Academic Facilities and Technical Support 15
Criterion 6: Curriculum and Teaching-Learning Processes 17
Criterion 7: Program Educational Objectives (PEOs) 20
Criterion 8: Program Outcomes (POs) and Assessment 21
Criterion 9: Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI) 23
Criterion 10: Interactions with the Industry 25
Appendix 26
Certificate of Compliance 28
TABLE OF ANNEXURES
GENERAL INFORMATION
1. Program title _____________________________________________

Abbreviation _____________________________________________
2. Department name _________________________________________
Institution name _________________________________________
3. Ownership status Public Private Other
4. Full postal address of institution_____________________________
___________________________________________________________
5 Tel. No. _________________________
6. Fax No. __________________________
7. E-mail ___________________________________
8. Website/URL _____________________________________________
9. University affiliation (if applicable) _________________________
__________________________________________________________
10. Year the university was established ________________________
11. Year the program began ___________________________________
12. Information about last accreditation
Applying for the first time? Yes No
Was granted accreditation for ................years in 20...................
Applied in 20............... but was not accredited/deferred
CONTACT INFORMATION
Name ___________________________________________________________
Mailing Address _________________________________________________
Telephone _______________________________________________________
Fax _____________________________________________________________
Email ___________________________________________________________
ELIGIBILITY FOR ACCREDITATION
Answer the following questions:
1. Is the institution approved by an appropriate authority?

Yes _____ No _____
If yes, state the name of the approving authority and attach a copy of the approval letter.
2. Is the program seeking accreditation approved by an appropriate authority?

Yes _____ No _____
If yes, state the name of the approving authority and attach a copy of the approval letter.
3. Is the stipulated duration of the program for a full-time student four years?
Yes _____ No _____
4. Does admission to the program require a minimum of twelve years of schooling?

Yes _____ No _____
5. Does the program follow an outcome-based education approach?

Yes _____ No _____
6. Is a minimum of 130 credit hours (as per clause 2.1 of the BAETE accreditation manual)
required to graduate from the program?
Yes _____ No _____
7. Do statutory bodies (e.g., Syndicate, Academic Council, Finance Committee, Disciplinary

Committee, Faculty Recruitment Committee) exist, and are they functional?
Yes _____ No _____
8. Does the department offering the program have an adequate number of full-time faculty
members, including senior faculty members, with relevant academic specializations?
Yes _____ No _____
9. Does the institution have adequate lab facilities for the program?
Yes _____ No _____
A program will be considered for accreditation only if the answers to all nine questions above
are positive. The application will not be accepted if the answer to any of the nine questions is
negative.
Proceed with the application only if there is no negative response to any of the above nine
questions.
FOR RENEWAL OF ACCREDITATION ONLY
Addressing deficiencies, weaknesses and concerns identified during the most recent
accreditation evaluation(s) (not applicable for new accreditation applications)
List the (i) deficiencies, (ii) weaknesses and (iii) concerns identified during the most recent
accreditation assessment(s). Mention the remedial actions taken and the improvements made
for each item and provide copies of documents that support the assertions.
Statement Remedial actions taken Improvements made
Deficiencies
Weaknesses
Concerns
Please attach a copy of the most recent accreditation certificate and the final statement
received from the BAETE in the Appendix.
Criterion 1: Organization and Governance
1.1 Background Information
Describe in no more than 300 words the historical background of the institution and the
program under evaluation.
1.2 Compliance with relevant acts and statutes
Provide answers to the following:
Issue Approving authority

The institution is approved by
The program is approved by
The curriculum of the program is approved by
*Copy of each approval document must be provided in the Annexure.
1.3 Organizational structure
Provide the up-to-date organogram of the institution.
1.4 Statutory positions and bodies of the institution
1.4.1 Appointment of Vice Chancellor, Pro-Vice Chancellor and Treasurer
State the process for appointing the following office bearers:
Appointment of Appointing/ Date and period Reference to

approving of appointment clause/section/article
authority of Act/ Statute/Rule*
Vice Chancellor
Pro-Vice Chancellor
Treasurer
*Refer to any other published documents other than acts/statutes/rules if necessary.
1.4.2 Formation and function of the statutory bodies
For each syndicate, the academic council, the finance committee, the faculty selection
committee, the disciplinary committee and any other statutory committee, state the assigned
responsibility (as per act/ordinance/statutes) of the committee. Prepare a table as follows for
each committee.
Name and affiliation of member Membership capacity From – to

Comment briefly on the alignment of the actual activities of each committee with the assigned
responsibilities.
List the dates of the meeting(s) of each of the statutory bodies during the last calendar year.
Attach a copy of the most recent meeting notice of each committee in the Annexure.
1.4.3 Formation and function of the management committees
Institutions often form committees in addition to statutory bodies for the smoother running
of academic and administrative activities. For each such committee, state the assigned
responsibility of the committee. Prepare a table as follows for each committee.
Name and affiliation of member Membership capacity From – to
Comment briefly on the alignment of the actual activities of each committee with the assigned
responsibilities.
List the dates of the meeting(s) of each management committee during the last calendar year.
Attach a copy of the most recent meeting notice of each committee in the Annexure.
1.5 Existence of and adherence to policies
1.5.1 Documented policies
Provide copies of the statutes, the ordinances and any other relevant policies such as service
rules, academic rules, codes of conduct, disciplinary rules, recruitment and promotion policies,
salary structure, leave rules, and scholarship and financial aid policies for students and
employees. Describe how each of these policies is disseminated to the stakeholders.
1.5.2 Adherence to policies
Describe briefly the extent to which the policies are adhered to when making academic and
administrative decisions. Additionally, list the frequency of exception requests and the cases in
which exceptions are made. The process for making exceptions, if any exists, should be
outlined.
Discuss how the effectiveness of the policies is evaluated and the processes that are followed to
update a policy. Give relevant examples, where applicable, to justify assertions.
1.6 Grievance redress system
Present documents that pertain to the existence of a grievance redress mechanism, if any, for
students and employees. Briefly discuss to what extent the system has been used in reality. Give
examples to justify the assertions.
1.7 Alumni association
If an alumni association exists, provide information about its formation, membership and
operating process. Additionally, provide the appropriate link to the alumni association on the
web.
1.8 Convocation
List the dates of convocations and the number of students who have received a degree over the
last three calendar years.
Date of convocation Total no. of students No. of students in the

(dd/mm/yyyy) who have received program under evaluation
the degree who have received a degree
Criterion 2: Financial and Physical Resources
2.1 Finance and budget
2.1.1 Assets commensurate with revenue
Please complete the following table for the last three calendar years.
Information Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

Total income (BDT)
Total capital investment (BDT)
Total operational expenditure (BDT)
Total asset (BDT)
2.1.2 Adequacy of budget
State the amount budgeted and the actual expenditure in BDT and percentage of the total
amount for the following sectors for each of the last three calendar years. In case of shared
budgetary allocation and expenditure, please indicate the following.
- Salary of the faculty members of the institution and of the program under evaluation
- Salary of the non-teaching staff of the institution and of the program under evaluation
- Laboratories of the institution and the program under evaluation
- Physical infrastructure (space, furniture, air conditioners)
- IT
- Maintenance
- Medical center
- Co-curricular and extra-curricular activities

- Library
Briefly discuss whether the budgeted amounts are adequate for the proper running of the
program under evaluation. If they are not, indicate the sectors where inadequacy exists. Identify
what measures are being taken to address the inadequacies.
2.1.3 Appropriateness of budgetary allocation
Describe the budgetary planning process, the identification of priority areas and resource
allocation. Additionally, describe the general process of preparing and approving the budget,
including feedback from the stakeholders.
2.2 Scholarships and financial aid for students
State the total amount in BDT given to students of the institution as well as the students of
the program under consideration such as scholarships and financial aid during each of the last
three academic years. Express the amount as a percentage of the institution’s total income.
2.3 Accommodations for male and female students
State whether the institution provides accommodations for students. If so, give the total
number of students using institutional accommodation and provide a gender breakdown for
each semester during the last three calendar years.
2.4 Safety measures: infrastructure, practices, training and compliance
Provide details for the following including compliance with regulatory requirements where
applicable.
- Firefighting policy, facility and rehearsal

- Emergency evacuation and assembly plan and rehearsal
- Campus safety and security measures in place
- Disabled access and mobility
- Safety measures in the labs
2.5 Sports and recreational facilities
Provide details of the institution’s outdoor games and sports facilities.

Provide details of the institution’s indoor games and recreational facilities.
Provide details of student clubs and their activities.
2.6 Placement center
State the designated activities and functions of the placement center if such a center exists.
Additionally, provide the organogram of the center and state the name and designation of each
staff member along with his or her qualifications.
Criterion 3: Faculty
3.1 Number of full-time faculty members
Provide a list of full-time faculty members teaching in the program for each semester of the
last three academic years, as per the following table. State whether the program has a sufficient
number of qualified faculty members with relevant areas of specialization to teach all the
courses offered for the program.
Name Designation Area of Highest Years of experiences Date Total

specialization academic Teaching Industrial of joining weekly
degree (if any) this teaching
institution load (in
hours)
Additionally, provide detailed curriculum vitae for each faculty member, including a complete
list of publications, in the Annexure. The format of the faculty curriculum vitae is given in
Appendix-A of this template.
3.2 Number of part-time faculty members
Provide a list of part-time faculty members teaching in the program for each semester during
the last three academic years, as per the following table.
Name Designation Area of Highest Years of experiences Date Total

specialization academic Teaching Industrial of joining weekly
degree (if any) this teaching
institution load (in
hours)
Additionally, provide detailed curriculum vitae in the Annexure for each faculty member,
including a list of publications. The format of the faculty curriculum vitae is given in
Appendix-A of this template.
3.3 Class size
State the minimum class size, the maximum class size and the average class size of all the
courses/sections offered by the program for each of the semesters during the last three
academic years. State whether the class size is suitable for conducting teaching-learning and
assessment activities to achieve all the course outcomes. In the Annexure, provide a list of all
the courses offered by the program, including the class size and the name of the instructor, for
each semester during the last three academic years.
3.4 Student-teacher ratio
Calculate the student-teacher ratio of the program for each semester during the last three
academic years. Describe in detail the calculation procedure and justify the appropriateness of
the adopted calculation model. State whether the student-teacher ratio is suitable for
conducting the teaching-learning and assessment activities to achieve all the course outcomes
and for adequate interactions between teachers and students outside of class.
3.5 Involvement of faculty members in research, development and professional activities
Complete the following table for full-time faculty members in the current semester.
Name Designation No. of No. of consulting List of professional

journal/conference positions during society activities in
papers published in the last three years the last one year
the last three years
3.6 Role of faculty members in coordinating and improving the courses
Describe in detail the role of the faculty members in establishing course outcomes, selecting
appropriate pedagogical and assessment tools, updating course content, and making decisions
regarding quality improvements to the program.
Attach copies of the minutes of relevant meetings held during the last three academic years in
the Appendix in support of this assertion.
3.7 Training of faculty members on outcome-based education
List all the training events organized for department faculty members during the last three
calendar years in establishing appropriate course outcomes, conducting effective teaching-
learning activities, conducting suitable assessments, and measuring outcome achievement as per
the following table.
Date Title of the Number of attendees from Remarks

training event the relevant department
Provide a copy of the notice for each event and the list of attendees in the Annexure.
Criterion 4: Students
4.1 Existence of and adherence to a well-formulated admission policy, including

admission criteria
Describe in detail the admission policy and process to admit new students into the program
(attach published brochures/guidelines, website address). Discuss if any exceptions are made
to the admission policy in admitting students.
State any preferences/priorities in admissions/quotas. Provide the number of students

admitted into the program for each semester/term of the last three academic years in tabular
form.
Academic year Calendar span Semester/ Semester/Term II Semester/Term III

(from-to) Term I (if applicable) (if applicable)
Most recent
Most recent minus 1
Most recent minus 2
4.2 Policy for transfer students
Describe the policy and process for accepting the transfer students into the program and
provide details (attach published brochures/guidelines, website address). Mention the process
of determining the equivalence of transfer credits.
Provide information on the transfer of students as per the following table for the last three
academic years.
Name and Year and Number of Name and location of the institution and
ID of the Semester /Term transferred name of the program from where
student of transfer credits transferred credits were earned
4.3 Continuous monitoring and feedback of student’s academic performance
Describe the process of monitoring and providing continuous feedback to students regarding
their academic performance and outcome achievement. Describe measures that are in place to
help academically weaker students.
4.4 Advising and counseling
Describe the process of providing academic advising to the students. If each student is assigned
a faculty member as a designated advisor, provide advisor information for the three most
recent semesters/terms, as per the following table.
Name of the faculty member Designation No. of advisees assigned
Discuss the nature of the advising activities with examples. State whether the advisors maintain
advising files or any other records of advising.
Describe in detail whether the department/institution provides professional counseling

support to students in need.
4.5 Extra- and co-curricular activities
State the policy of the institution/department, if any exists, regarding students’ extra- and co-
curricular activities. State how these activities are encouraged/supported institutionally. List
students in the program who have participated in student activities at the institutional level or
higher in the past three academic years. Additionally, list notable achievements involving
students from the program, if any.
4.6 Professional society activities
List the names of professional societies that have a student branch/chapter and describe
related support/facilities/activities within the institution. Additionally, provide a list of the
names of the student members from the program in each branch/chapter for each of the last
three academic years.
Criterion 5: Academic Facilities and Technical Support
5.1 Library
5.1.1 Space and hours of operation
State the total space allocated for the library and the number of students served by the library.
State the library’s operating hours.
5.1.2 Library resources (books, technical journals, proceedings)
Provide information on books, journals, proceedings and other resources in the following table
Category No. of titles No. of copies (if applicable)

Books (hard copy)
Books (electronic) NA
Journals (hard copy)
Journals (electronic) NA
Proceedings (hard copy)
Proceedings (electronic) NA
Others
5.1.3 Modernization of the library
Describe how IT and other modern technologies have influenced the use, operation and
record-keeping of the library for both users and library officials.
5.2 Classrooms
Provide a statement on the number, usage and facilities of classrooms available to the program.
Justify whether these resources are adequate for the program.
5.3 Laboratories and equipment
5.3.1 Laboratories for all relevant courses of the curriculum
List all the laboratory courses and the corresponding name and location of the laboratory
where the classes are conducted. Prepare a table for each semester of the last academic year.
Serial Course no. Laboratory Location of the lab

number and name name (campus/building/floor/room #)
5.3.2 Availability of equipment
For each laboratory, prepare a table of as per the following table.
Name of the laboratory:
Serial Name of the Quantity Date and cost of Present condition

number equipment purchase
5.4 Full-time technical support staff for laboratories (technician/instructor and assistant)
For each laboratory, list the full-time technical personnel as per the following table.
Name of Name of person Designation Qualification Experience

laboratory (education, training) (years)
5.5 Improvements of laboratory facilities
Describe the improvements that have been made in the laboratories for the program during the
last three academic years. Describe the plans currently under consideration for laboratory
improvement.
5.6 Safety and health measures in the laboratories
Describe the safety rules, procedures and practices that are in place in each of the laboratories
used by the program. Describe what provisions exist in each laboratory in case of accidents and
health hazard conditions.
5.7 Internet and computing facilities
List the Internet facilities available for students and faculty members. Required information
includes total bandwidth, number of computers with Internet connections, daily hours that the
services are available and areas covered by Wi-Fi.
List the number of laboratories, including the number of computers that are accessible to
students outside of class/lab times. Identify the types of uses that are available to students.
Computers in the library or in any other common place may be considered if such facilities are
available.
Criterion 6: Curriculum and Teaching-Learning Processes
6.1 Curriculum
6.1.1 Minimum credit hours
State the minimum number of credit hours required to earn the degree under the program.
Express the number in contact hours, explaining the calculation method used. Convert the
program’s credit hours as per the conversion rules stated in Section 2.1 of the BAETE
accreditation manual.
6.1.2 Course content
Complete the following table that describes the category of each course, e.g., mathematics,
basic science, language, humanities and social sciences, non-engineering skills, engineering,
design project, others. Note that humanities and social sciences courses are non-skill courses.
Non-engineering skill courses, such as accounting, should not be categorized as humanities

courses. Additionally, indicate for each course whether it is a program requirement or an
elective.
Course no. Course Credit Contact hours per Category Required/elective

title hours semester /term
Also submit the detailed content of each course offered by the program, including credit hours,
contact hours, prerequisites and a list of the textbooks and reference books in the Annexure.
The format of the detailed course content is given in Appendix-B of this template.
6.1.3 Program-specific criteria
Provide a breakdown of the structure of the curriculum detailing the credits assigned in each
category(as mentioned in Section 6.1.2). Describe how the curriculum meets the requirements
of the relevant program-specific criteria.
6.1.4 Flow chart
Submit a semester-by-semester flow chart or worksheet that depicts the prerequisite structure
of the required courses of the program in the Appendix.
6.1.5 List of offered courses
Submit the program’s course offering list for each semester of the last three academic years in
the Annexure.
6.1.6 Course files
The department should maintain a course file for each course offered by the department for
the program in each semester of the last three academic years. If a lab is integrated with theory
in any course, separate course files should be prepared for the theory and the lab parts of the
course.
The course files shall be made available during the on-site visit for perusal by the members of
the evaluation team. The course file must contain at least the following items.
− Lecture plan detailing prerequisites, course outcomes and content, text and reference
books, assessment tools for each course outcome, and grading policy
− Questions and three representative examples of answer scripts (one excellent, one average,
one marginal pass) for each exam, class test and quiz (for theory courses)
− Lab sheet and three representative examples of lab reports (for lab courses)
− Assessment criteria or rubrics for assignments/projects/lab activities. Three representative

examples for each assignment/project/lab activity report
− Final tabulation sheet including grade assigned to each student
− Assessment of outcome achievement for each course outcome
6.2 Laboratory activities
State how the program gives importance to hands-on lab activities incorporating higher order
learning as per a learning taxonomy.
Provide the list of experiments, including open-ended experiments, conducted in each lab
course. Additionally, list the projects/assignments given in each lab course. Provide
information for each semester of the last three academic years.
6.3 Final-year design project
Describe the process followed in conducting the final-year design projects. Describe how the
experience in the final-year design project is based on the knowledge and skills acquired in
earlier coursework and incorporates appropriate engineering standards and multiple design
constraints.
Provide a list of the titles of final-year design projects completed in each semester of the last
three academic years, as per the following table.
Design project title Name(s) of the supervisor(s) Names of the group members
The original final reports should be made available during the on-site visit for perusal by the
members of the evaluation team.
In case the program demonstrates culmination of POs through any method other than the
Final-year design project, describe the method in detail highlighting how the method used is
based on the knowledge and skills acquired in earlier coursework and how it incorporates
appropriate engineering standards and multiple design constraints.
6.4 Teaching-learning and assessment activities
Describe the process used to select appropriate teaching-learning activities in different courses.
Highlight the interactive/non-traditional activities adopted in different courses, noting the
course and the activity.
Describe the process used to select appropriate assessment tools in different courses. Highlight
the tools that are used for assessing skills and attitudes.
6.5 Academic calendar
Provide the published academic calendar for each semester of the last three academic years.
State whether the semester actually progressed according to the calendar. If not, indicate the
deviations in each semester.
Criterion 7: Program Educational Objectives (PEOs)
7.1 Mission and Vision
− State the institution’s vision and mission

− State the vision and mission of the department/faculty/school offering the program
7.2 Program Educational Objectives (PEOs): Statements and their mapping with the
institutional/departmental mission
State the Program Educational Objectives (PEOs) and show their alignment with the
institutional/departmental mission, as per the following table.
PEO PEO statement Institutional/departmental mission statements

No. Mission Mission … … Mission
statement 1 statement 2 statement n
1
2
.
7.3 Process for PEO establishment and measurement
7.3.1 PEO establishment
Describe the process of establishing the PEOs. Highlight how the feedback of external
stakeholders was incorporated in developing the PEO.
7.3.2 PEO measurement
Describe the process of measuring the attainment of each PEO including rubrics. Provide
evidence and documents.
Criterion 8: Program Outcomes (POs) and Assessment
8.1 Program outcome (PO) statements and their mapping with the PEOs
State the program outcomes (POs) and show their alignment with PEOs as per the following
table.
PO No. PO statement PEO 1 PEO 2 … … …

a
b
c
d
.
.
.
Indicate the correlation using either binary levels (yes/no) or ternary levels (high/low/none).
Leave the cell blank if there is no correlation (no/none).
8.2 Course outcomes (COs)
8.2.1 Statements of COs
State the COs for each core course offered by the program, which are used to demonstrate
attainment of POs, as per the following table.
CO CO Corresponding Domain/level of Delivery methods Assessment

No. statement PO No. learning taxonomy and activities tools
The COs of all other courses offered by the program, listed by department, along with the
corresponding domain/level of learning taxonomy, delivery methods and activities and
assessment tools, should be provided in the Annexure.
8.2.2 Relationship between COs and POs
For each course included in the table of Section 8.2.1, present a map of COs and POs, as per
the following table. Alternatively, the following information may be presented graphically.
Course No. and title CO No. PO-a PO-b … … … …
Indicate the correlation using either binary levels (yes/no) or ternary levels (high/low/none).
Leave the cell blank if there is no correlation (no/none).
8.3 Knowledge Profile, Complex Engineering Problems and Complex Engineering

Activities
Demonstrate, through mapping, how each attribute of the Knowledge Profile (K1 – K8) is
addressed in the curriculum. Additionally, demonstrate how each attribute of the Range of
Complex Engineering Problems (P1 – P7) and Complex Engineering Activities (A1 – A5) is
incorporated in the teaching, learning and assessment.
8.4 Assessment of COs
Describe how the attainment of COs is assessed in each course, including the rubrics, where
applicable. The assessment processes, attainment criteria and scale, and expected level of
attainment should be clearly stated. Present a summarized assessment of the COs of the
courses listed in the table of Section 8.2.2. Evidence of CO assessments for the other courses
offered by the department for the program in each semester of the last calendar year should be
included in the Annexure.
8.5 Attainment of POs required by the BAETE
8.5.1 Attainment of PO(a): Engineering Knowledge
Describe how the attainment of PO(a) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
tools, criteria and scale used in the assessment process. State the expected level of attainment.
State how Knowledge Profile attributes (K1 – K4) are incorporated in PO(a). Identify which
of the attributes of the Range of Complex Engineering Problems (P1 – P7) are addressed
through the attainment of PO(a) and provide evidence to support the assertion. Present a
summary of the results obtained after the assessment and analysis to demonstrate the extent to
which PO(a) is being attained.
8.5.2 Attainment of PO(b): Problem Analysis
Describe how the attainment of PO(b) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
State how Knowledge Profile attributes (K1 – K4) are incorporated in PO(b). Identify which
of the attributes of the Range of Complex Engineering Problems (P1 – P7) are addressed
through the attainment of PO(b) and provide evidence to support the assertion. Present a
summary of the results obtained after the assessment and analysis to demonstrate the extent to
which PO(b) is being attained.
8.5.3 Attainment of PO(c): Design/Development of Solutions
Describe how the attainment of PO(c) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
State how Knowledge Profile attribute K5 is incorporated in PO(c). Identify which of the
attributes of the Range of Complex Engineering Problems (P1 – P7) are addressed through
the attainment of PO(c) and provide evidence to support the assertion. Present a summary of
the results obtained after the assessment and analysis to demonstrate the extent to which
PO(c) is being attained.
8.5.4 Attainment of PO(d): Investigation
Describe how the attainment of PO(d) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
State how Knowledge Profile attribute K8 is incorporated in PO(d).
Identify which of the attributes of the Range of Complex Engineering Problems (P1 – P7) are
addressed through the attainment of PO(d) and provide evidence to support the assertion.
Present a summary of the results obtained after the assessment and analysis to demonstrate the
extent to which PO(d) is being attained.
8.5.5 Attainment of PO(e): Modern Tool Usage
Describe how the attainment of PO(e) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
State how Knowledge Profile attribute K6 is incorporated in PO(e). Identify which of the
the attainment of PO(e) and provide evidence to support the assertion. Present a summary of
PO(e) is being attained.
8.5.6 Attainment of PO(f): The Engineer and Society
Describe how the attainment of PO(f) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
State how Knowledge Profile attribute K7 is incorporated in PO(f). Identify which of the
the attainment of PO(f) and provide evidence to support the assertion. Present a summary of
the results obtained after the assessment and analysis to demonstrate the extent to which PO(f)
is being attained.
8.5.7 Attainment of PO(g): Environment and Sustainability
Describe how the attainment of PO(g) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
State how Knowledge Profile attribute K7 is incorporated in PO(g). Identify which of the
the attainment of PO(g) and provide evidence to support the assertion. Present a summary of
PO(g) is being attained.
8.5.8 Attainment of PO(h): Ethics
Describe how the attainment of PO(h) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
State how Knowledge Profile attribute K7 is incorporated in PO(h.) Present a summary of the
results obtained after the assessment and analysis to demonstrate the extent to which PO(h) is
being attained.
8.5.9 Attainment of PO(i): Individual and Teamwork
Describe how the attainment of PO(i) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
tools, criteria and scale used in the assessment process. Identify the expected level of
attainment. Present a summary of the results obtained after the assessment and analysis to
demonstrate the extent to which PO(i) is being attained.
8.5.10 Attainment of PO(j): Communication
Describe how the attainment of PO(j) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
Identify which of the attributes of the Range of Complex Engineering Activities (A1 – A5) are
addressed through the attainment of PO(j) and provide evidence to support the assertion.
extent to which PO(j) is being attained.
8.5.11 Attainment of PO(k): Project Management and Finance
Describe how the attainment of PO(k) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
extent to which PO(k) is being attained.
8.5.12 Attainment of PO(l): Lifelong Learning
Describe how the attainment of PO(l) is assessed and evaluated. State and justify the methods,
extent to which PO(l) is being attained.
8.6 Achievement of additional POs
Describe how the attainment of each additional PO (if any) is assessed and evaluated. State
and justify the methods, tools, criteria and scale used in the assessment process. State the
expected level of attainment for each of the additional POs. Present a summary of the results
obtained after the assessment and analysis to demonstrate the extent to which each additional
PO is being attained.
Criterion 9: Continuous Quality Improvement (CQI)
9.1 Feedback from students
9.1.1 Student evaluation of courses
State whether students evaluate every course/instructor at the end of the semester. If yes,
provide a sample student evaluation form in the Annexure.
9.1.2 Student survey
State whether the department/institution conducts a periodic survey of the students to assess
the level of outcome achievements. If yes, provide the survey form in the Annexure.
9.2 Feedback from course instructors
State whether course instructors evaluate every course offered by department for the program
at the end of the semester. If yes, provide a sample instructor evaluation form in the Annexure.
9.3 Feedback from external stakeholders
9.3.1 Feedback from alumni
State how the department collects feedback from alumni regarding PEO and PO achievements.
Provide supporting documents (survey results, meeting minutes).
9.3.2 Feedback from employers
State how the department collects feedback from employers regarding PEO and PO
achievements. Provide supporting documents (survey results, meeting minutes).
9.4 CQI loops
9.4.1 CQI Loop for PEO
Describe the CQI processes for PEOs. In particular, discuss how the results of the evaluation
and feedback from various stakeholders are systematically utilized to continuously improve the
PEOs.
The feedback loop should be shown either pictorially as in a flow diagram or in tabular form.
State any significant, justifiable future improvement plan that has been devised based on the
present evaluation results.
Provide copies of documents (survey results, analysis reports, meeting minutes) to justify each
statement.
9.4.2 CQI Loop for PO
Describe the CQI processes for POs. In particular, discuss how the results of direct and
indirect assessments including feedback from various stakeholders are systematically utilized to
continuously improve the PO attainments.
The loop should be shown either pictorially as in a flow diagram or in tabular form. State any
significant, justifiable future improvement plan that has been devised based on the present
evaluation results.
Provide copies of documents (survey results, assessment and analysis reports, meeting minutes,
etc.) to justify each statement.
9.4.3 CQI Loop for CO and Curriculum
Describe the CQI processes for COs in courses and curriculum. In particular, discuss how the
results of assessment and feedback from various stakeholders are systematically utilized to
continuously improve the COs, their attainments and the curriculum.
The CQI loop should be shown either pictorially as in a flow diagram or in tabular form. State
any significant, justifiable future improvement plan that has been devised based on the present
evaluation results.
Provide copies of documents (survey results, assessment and analysis reports, meeting minutes)
to justify each statement.
Criterion 10: Interactions with the industry
10.1 Industrial advisory panel
List the names, designations and professional qualifications of the members of the
program/department’s industrial advisory panel. Submit copies of notices for the industrial
advisory panel meetings and the attendee lists of meetings held over the last three academic
years. The minutes of these meetings should be made available to members of the Evaluation
Team during the on-site visit.
10.2 Participation of the industry in academic updates
Explain how industrial participation is ensured in the establishment, update and improvement
of the objectives, outcomes and curriculum to ensure that these aspects remain relevant to the
industry. This description should be correlated to the discussion in Section 7.3 of the SAR
template.
Provide copies of documents in support of the given explanation.
10.3 Students’ opportunities to gain industrial experience
10.3.1 Internships
State whether the students in the program are required to perform an industrial internship. If
yes, describe the nature and the duration of the internship. Explain how student performance
and outcome achievements during the internship are assessed.
Provide copies of documents that support the given explanation.
10.3.2 Final-year design project
State whether the final-year design projects are conducted with industry collaboration. If yes,
provide details regarding the industry’s involvement in selecting the project topic, supervising
project activities and providing assessment.
In case the program demonstrates culmination of POs through any method other than the
Final-year design project, describe how the selected method incorporates industry
collaboration providing details. Provide copies of documents that support the given
explanation.
10.3.3 Industry visits
State whether the students in the program are required to visit companies within the industry.
If yes, provide details regarding the nature of such visits. Explain how student learning and
outcome achievement as a result of such visits are assessed.

Annexure A: Faculty Curriculum Vitae

The curriculum vitae of the faculty members should be included in the Annexure as directed
in sections 3.1 and 3.2 of the SAR template.
Please use the following format for preparing the curriculum vitae (maximum 2 pages) for
each of the faculty members under the program.
1. Name
2. Designation
3. Educational qualification (start from highest) – degree, discipline, institution, year
4. Academic experience (most recent first) – institution, designation,
period (mm/yyyy - mm/yyyy), type (full-time or part-time)
5. Non-academic experience (research, industrial) – organization, title/position, period
(mm/yyyy - mm/yyyy), type (full-time or part-time)
6. Fellowship/membership of academic bodies and professional organizations
7. Honors and awards
8. List of significant publications and presentations in the five most recent years – title,
names of the author(s), name of the journal/conference where published/presented,
month and year of publication or presentation
9. List of Professional Consultancy and Sponsored Research activities in the five most recent
years – organization, title of the consultancy/research project, amount received if any,
year
Annexure B: Course Content

The detailed content of each course offered by the program should be included in the
Annexure as directed in Section 6.2 of the SAR template.
Please use the following format for preparing the course syllabi of each of the program’s
required and elective courses.
1. Course number and title

2. Credit hours:
3. Contact hours:
4. Course Prerequisites or Co-requisites:
5. Course Instructor/coordinator:
6. Brief description of the course contents (catalog description)
7. List of Text/Reference books including title, author, edition, publisher and year
CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
By signing below, we certified that all the information given in this Self-Assessment
Report (SAR) for the accreditation of the __________________ (Name of
program) is correct to the best of our knowledge.
It is also attested that this report is prepared in compliance with the BAETE
Accreditation Manual for Undergraduate Engineering Programs.
_____________________________ ____________________________
Name of the Head of the Department Name of the Head of the Institution
_____________________________ ____________________________
Signature Signature
_____________________________ ____________________________
Date Date
ANNEX
Process Flow Chart I

Submit
application
Evaluation Team
formation Communicate reservation
to reform the Team
Any reservation
Yes
about the Team?
No
Review SAR:
Yes shows significant
deficiencies
Recommended No
decision is NA
Evaluation Team complete three-
day onsite visit, exit meeting to
present preliminary findings
The Team
recommend deferment Yes
decision
No
Report submitted by the

Evaluation Team
After scrutiny by Sectoral

Committee moderated report
will be sent to the institution
Response of the institution on

factual matters
Recommendation of the
Sectoral Committee
Communicate Board the
Accreditation decision taken deferment decision for approval
by the Board
Communicate decision to the

institution
End of accreditation
process
ANNEX
Typical Evaluation Team

Visit Schedule
II
DAY ONE
: 08.30 A.M. Arrival of the evaluation team and discussion among team members
: 09.00 A.M. Discussion with the Management

(Vice Chancellor, Pro-Vice Chancellor, relevant dean,
relevant chairperson)
: 10.00 A.M. Discussion with students
: 12.00 P.M. Visit to labs and classrooms
: 01.00 P.M. Working lunch
: 02.00 P.M. Discussion with faculty members
: 04.00 P.M. Discussion with support staff
: 04.30 P.M. Tea/Discussion among evaluation team members
: 05.00 P.M. Departure
DAY TWO
: 09.00 A.M. Visit to library, IT office, support departments, co- and extra-curricular
facilities
: 11.00 A.M. Tea
: 11.15 A.M. Visit to labs and classrooms (continued)

AII-02 Appendix C Typical Evaluation Team Visit Schedule
: 02.00 P.M. Examination of documents
: 03.00 P.M. Discussion with alumni and employers
: 04.30 P.M. Tea/Discussion among evaluation team members
DAY THREE
: 08.30 A.M. Examination of documents
: 10.30 A.M. Seeking additional information, or making additional visits,

if deemed necessary
: 11.00 A.M. Tea.
: 11.15 A.M. Finalization of the findings of the evaluation team
: 12.15 P.M. Debriefing the program head
: 02.30 P.M. Exit meeting with the Management to report the findings
of the evaluation team

2nd Edi 05.03.2019 F PDF

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Titolo originale

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

2nd Edi 05.03.2019 F PDF

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

INSTITUTION OF ENGINEERS, BANGLADESH

BOARD OF ACCREDITATION FOR

BOARD OF ACCREDITATION FOR

Chapter 2 – Accreditation Policy 2-01

Chapter 3 – Accreditation Procedure 3-01

Chapter 4 – Criteria 4-01

4.4 Students…………………………………………………………………… 4-02

Chapter 5 – Review by Evaluation Team 5-01

Chapter 6 – Program-Specific Criteria 6-01

Chapter 7 – Self-Assessment Report Format 7-01

Annex – I Process Flow Chart

Pro-VC Pro-Vice Chancellor

To become a member of IEB and provide professional services in Bangladesh, an

Objectives of Accreditation 1.2

The specific objectives of accreditation are as follows:

1.3 Board of Accreditation for Engineering and Technical Education

1.3.1 Formation, Authorities and Functions

1.3.2 Composition and Terms of Office

Management and Finance 1.3.3

Sectoral Committees 1.3.4

Appellate Committee 1.3.5

a. An engineering degree-awarding program approved by an appropriate authority,

The following should be noted:

i. Accreditation is voluntary and programs are considered for review and

2.2 Preliminary Evaluation of New Programs

2.4 Accreditation Decisions

2.5 Deferment of Accreditation

Expenses and Fees 2.7

Conflicts of Interest 2.9

current or former faculty or staff member at the concerned institution, serving as a

The accreditation decision is made by the Board following a rigorous evaluation

Steps in the Accreditation Process 3.2

1. Submission of the application

Steps Maximum allocated time

3.3 Application and Submissions

3.4 Formation of the Evaluation Team

3.5 Pre-visit Activities

Accreditation Visit 3.6

a. Objectives and outcomes of the education provided

b. Availability of the following documents for examination:

3.7 Post-visit Activities of Evaluation Team

Compliance: A criterion, policy, or procedure has adequately satisfied the benchmark

Concern: A criterion, policy, or procedure is broadly in compliance but requires

Weakness: A criterion, policy, or procedure lacks compliance, compromising the

Deficiency: A criterion, policy, or procedure either does not exist or is in the

Scrutiny by Sectoral Committee 3.8

Response of Institution 3.9

3.10 Decision Process

3.11 Follow-up Action as a Requirement for Accreditation

3.12 Dispute Resolution

Organization and Governance 4.1

Financial and Physical Resources 4.2

should be adequate. An action plan is required to address safety issues as the

The faculty members should have adequate academic qualifications with

Faculty members should be engaged in research, development and professional

Students’ academic performance should be continuously monitored in terms of the

should be provisions for remedial or corrective measures when necessary. Every

Students should have opportunities to participate in extra- and co-curricular activities

Academic Facilities and Technical Support 4.5

Curriculum and Teaching-Learning Processes 4.6

4.7 Program Educational Objectives

A process should be developed to assess the level of attainment of each PEO to

4.8 Program Outcomes and Assessment